Reed want to see my husband's bank statements 😩

[Weepingwillowtree]

Desperate to get back into the workplace after 10 years out being a SAHM. Plucked up the courage to go for a Reed interview for a teaching assistant job (no qualifications required even though I have a BSc). Was told I had too much of a gap in my CV and they would need to see my husbands bank statements to “prove that I had been supported by him during this time”. I feel this is a total invasion of our privacy, what has my husbands finances got to do with whether or not I am capability of being a teaching assistant?? Am I being completely unreasonable refusing to provide this? They said they can’t give me a job unless I show his bank statements 😩

The only reason you give a bank statement dated less than 3 months old for a DBS check is as proof of Id and address. Not for your history of employment or whereabouts.

So a person (most likely to be a mother who has been staying at home until her youngest child starts school) is interviewed by an employment agency for a job as an teaching assistant.

But the employment agency needs proof that she’s been a stay at home parent.

You couldn’t make this up!

The question about being qualified and experienced is not only what is important when working with the vulnerable

If you were single and unemployed then you’d presumably be claiming benefits and able to prove that. I guess the aim is to prove that you weren’t working in a job for which you were sacked for serious but non-criminal wrongdoing.

@dementedpixie

How would looking at a bank statement show one way or another that they were or were not in Jail in Thailand?

@dementedpixie @NickyHeath

I DID say that it would not occur to me to require bank statements!!

If that is Reed’s policy then that’s up to them and they’re the people that you should be questioning about it….

I am pointing out that under Safer Recruitment requirements CV gaps do have to be checked because the person assessing a candidate for a post does not know that candidate and the consequences for everyone would be dire if a wrong ‘un got through 🤷🏻‍♀️

Ridiculous. But I had similar with Reed about 15 years back, when their Occ Health asked my GP for waaaaaaaaaay more than the required medical information. (GP was only too happy to tell them on my behalf where to stick it...)

No it isn't, which is why Safer Recruitment, references, dbs checks and discussion of employment history is all essential. Also why all this is followed up in schools by annual safeguarding training and instruction on what constitutes safeguarding and how to report it (I assume similar happens in the NHS).

I want to know how you think production of a third party bank statement protects "the vulnerable".

Where is OP

Hopefully filling in applications and applying directly to schools.

Wtf? I'm a teacher. I have gaps on my CV where I was a SAHM and also gaps where I was between temporary teaching jobs. I have never been asked to give any proof of this whatsoever. And if I had been, I don't see how dh's bank statements would have proved anything at all. I have obviously had DBS checks done, many times, as I've worked for lots of schools. Not once have I been asked for any financial evidence of anything whatsoever. It sounds absolutely nuts tbh OP!

But there is such a thing as data protection law , the DPA 2018 and schools also have to abide by data protection laws. You have to have a lawful basis for processing data, what is it in this scenario?

That was a question to EstuaryBird.

Go elsewhere for agency work or via a school

NOPE ! This is so wrong!

@ItWasLikeThatWhenIGotHere

If you were single and unemployed then you’d presumably be claiming benefits and able to prove that. I guess the aim is to prove that you weren’t working in a job for which you were sacked for serious but non-criminal wrongdoing.

How is a partner's bank account prove that though? Surely OP's bank statements would make more sense.

We’re you told this by a man or woman?

I'm a TA. Apply directly to schools. I'm sure some agencies are fine but I hear loads of stories on TA FB groups about shady behaviour like this and worse (not paying for work and saying it was a trial shift is a recent example). I had to provide documentation of having had GSCE equivalents, and pass a DBS check.

I think that all school staff should be Registered with the DfE as teachers are. The DfE provides multiple additional ways to check on a teacher, but not other staff.

Haven’t read the full thread but this is awful op. I’m also not sure why a school are using a bog standard high street recruitment agency to recruit TAs? I thought most (if not all?) schools used the online eteach website for recruitment purposes.

FWIW I applied for a school based job after 10 years plus as a SAHM and was only asked for confirmation of what I’d been doing (a shed load of volunteer work as well as looking after my dc, in my case) during the years where I had employment gaps. I would have been outraged if they’d asked for bank statements

Panda, they do but big agencies trawl the sites and post the jobs on their own boards too.

Should add that that was at interview stage - I also had to provide volunteer work refs and pass enhanced dbs check etc once I’d been offered the job.

I don’t get why they wouldn’t ask for an enhanced DBS check - as even if your husband was supporting you, you could have been in prison for all they know!

@TSSDNCOP do they? Wow i didn’t realise that. Do they then try and sting the school for a placement fee too? Ugh. Sorry if I sound negative- I must admit I’ve had so many poor experiences of high street trecruitment agencies as an employer in the past that I wouldn’t ever use one as a job seeker now. So many of them are bloody awful, especially at admin recruitment level.

Only if the school is really stupid what you want is the candidate to use their loaf and go onto the school website and pull an application. School budgets are so tight, you only pay an agency where you have zero options and that would very rarely happen in recruiting TA's.

Never heard of that before. How strange.